Here's my fantasy of how Hillary could have responded to DT stalking her around the debate stage.

[pnwmom]

I don't think directly confronting him and ordering him to back off would have been the best idea. I think ignoring him and addressing the audience about his behavior would have been a better plan.

And it's worth thinking about the best response because he will do it again, to whichever Democrat he faces in 2020, unless he's impeached first.

I know exactly how it feels to be in Hillary's position, and I don't blame her for not having a little speech handy for that skin-crawling debate. But the next time a Democrat is on stage with Donald Trump, if he goes into his stalking routine, I would like the Democrat to keep his or her focus on the audience and say something like this:

Before I go on, I'm going to address the elephant in the room -- the way Donald has been stalking me around this small stage. The reason he's doing it is because, as a narcissist, he has to always be the center of attention. He can't stand that the focus right now is on me and what I have to say. So he's been following me around to make sure that he's in every shot along with me, bearing down on me. A narcissist would think that's a good strategy. Or maybe a narcissist just can't help himself. He has to always be the center of attention.

And the reason this matters, not just on the debate floor today, but for the next four years, is because a narcissist will NEVER have the needs of all of you, the people, in his mind. By definition the only thing a narcissist cares about is himself. The American people shouldn't elect a President who will always, consistently, put himself and his own wants and needs over those of the American people.

Now I'll tell you how I'm going to work for YOU . . . .

[NurseJackie]

1. Perfect!

[hlthe2b]

2. I like it.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. My fantasy is that she kicked him in the nuts, but of course that wouldn't do.

It's fun to think about, though.

[Thomas Hurt]

4. a quick knee to the nads would have worked too, but I wouldn't want to condone violence.

[frazzled]

5. Well, here's my fantasy

The next time he gets up to speak, she follows him around, making scowling faces and breathing down his neck.

People would get how outrageous such behavior is if a woman did it.

[unblock]

6. the problem is the media is so incredibly biased, they would have panned hillary for doing anything

back in the shrub-gore debates, at one point gore wandered into the frame near shrub.

before the debate, several pundits predicted he would do this as a time-honored tactic to illustrate the height difference (gore was taller, and the taller candidate usually wins). so what gore did was entirely expected and normal.

but shrub was caught off-guard, and when he turned and saw gore near him, shrub got startled and jumped a bit.

it was the most pathetic display of instinctive non-alpha male behavior, but the pundits went wild, instead jumping on gore for encroaching on shrub's space. note, these were the same pundits who said beforehand they expected gore to do it and that it was a perfectly good and legitimate debate tactic.

and of course they did, because they had to have an anti-democratic narrative.


and now remember, these same pundits who were outraged by gore encroaching on shrub's space couldn't be bothered to note donnie hovering over hillary like a stalker.

because, again, the narrative has to be anti-democratic.

on her part, hillary probably did the best she could. had she noted it, the pundits probably would have taken her to task for being thin-skinned or something. gee, if she can't cope with donnie being near her, how will she react to being near putin? you just know they'd find an angle to bash her for whatever she said about it.

[pnwmom]

7. I don't see why calmly explaining about his narcissism and how it wouldn't be good

for the American people would be seen as a sign that Hillary couldn't cope.

And if she had done that, I think he would have made an even bigger idiot of himself.

[unblock]

11. they would have howled about crossing a line, calling her opponent crazy,

insisting that she produce psychiatric proof, or insist themselves that hillary was practicing psychiatry without a license, who knows.

i can't say exactly what crap they'd throw at hillary to protect their preferred candidate, but i do know they would have thrown a ton of crap at her for saying anything along those lines.

heck, they probably would have questioned *her* sanity.


sorry, still pissed about how biased the media was during the election (as if i need to limited to a particular time period....)

[AngryAmish]

8. I wish she released a thunderclap of flatus.

[StatGirl]

9. There are so many people for whom narcissism is a feature and not a bug . . .

And she would be criticized for alienating them by using a big word.

I think she handled it fine, especially in the moment. But if she could get a do-over, I'd like to see her:

a.) Turn and stare at him for about 5 or 10 seconds;
b.) Shake her head and laugh;
c.) Turn back to the audience and resume what she was saying.

[ismnotwasm]

10. Nice!

[pansypoo53219]

12. should have elbowed him the balls, or gut at least.

he is not nice, so give him the same shit.

[pnwmom]

13. You think the media and the public would have reacted well to Hillary's "losing control"?